DocEmrick wrote:Terminator 2 was a cash-in cheesy action flick with horrible lines like "Let me try mine," and the others. Furlong's acting is horrendous. Terminator ends perfectly, with the viewer to draw their own conclusions about judgement day, etc.

That being said, I still enjoy all of the films (yes even 3), I just think Terminator would have worked fine as a stand-alone movie.

That's not the point of a sequel tho..... by definition any story should work as a standalone movie, or it shouldn't be made into a movie in the first place.

There was a desire to make a sequel from the earliest days of the original film's release, but various legal, financial and technical issues kept inhibiting development efforts. When the original film was released it wasn't exactly a juggernaut at the box office; according to BoxOfficeMojo.com, it's total worldwide take was only $38 million, good for only 21st of all the films released in 1984. (Top dog that year was Beverly Hills Cop which raked in $234 million.) Granted, it only cost $6 million to make, so the return was fantastic. But it cost the producers nearly that much just to secure the IP rights to even make the sequel, so even if you ignore inflation you're still starting in a $5 million hole at the outset on a sequel.... and sequels, historically, aren't as successful as the original film.

So I don't think that T2 was a cash-and-grab.

T2 and T:Salvation? Different story.

Also, I don't really see any qualitative difference between "Let me try mine" and "Hasta la vista, baby" and whatnot and lines from the first movie like "I'll be back" and the exchange with the gun store owner.

I've always preferred Terminator 2 and Ghostbusters 2 over their originals. I don't know, I felt that way as a kid and I still feel the same now. I guess like T2 and GB2 better as a kid and it stuck with me.

Froggy wrote:Cracked.com had a video a couple months ago pointing out why T2 was a great movie, but a terrible sequel because it broke the rules established by the first movie. pretty interesting observation.

I'd say all three film sequels were crap, but the TV series was actually pretty cool.When I saw the 4th film in theaters, the female lead was in the crowd with a bunch of her girlfriends. Every time she was on screen they'd cheer. It was cute the first time, and maybe the second time. By the 45 minute mark of the film, it was a bit of a different story.

tv show was pretty cool. first highlander is one of my favorites, the Kurgan is such an awesome bad guy (clancy brown is so cool, him and Brian Thompson (slasher in Cobra) always terrified me). The sequels were terrible (although I did like Endgame somewhat). I've always thought the concept could create a lot of great stories, but here we are.

I’d actually forgotten there were more sequels. There shouldn’t have been any. The whole plot of Highlander is that you have these guys who are somehow 99% immortal and all of them are engaged in the world’s most serious single-elimination tournament to get to the point where only one winner is left alive, at which point that winner will receive some sort of amazing supernatural prize. At the end, we have a winner, and he gets the prize. How could you have something after that (especially anything featuring planet Zeist )?

I honestly don't think Jaws 2 is as bad as it's reputation. It's a serviceable action film, neither good nor bad, that has a couple scenes that I think are actually pretty effective. (The opening, the water skier, the dive class, the first teenager that gets snuffed) It falls short because its predecessor was an all-time classic. Then again, perhaps that's why it should never have been made.

I will concede, however, that the entire premise - giant shark's giant mate terrorizes same beach town three years later - is a bit daft.